Donald Norman and Amir Taaki are unfortunately not good spokespersons for Bitcoin. i've heard both speak on all the publicly available podcasts they've done and i've not been impressed. in fact, quite disappointed wanting to leap into my monitor screens.
what we need is someone who is well spoken and can think quickly on their feet especially during a debate like this. they need a thorough grounding in Austrian economics and need to stay well read on current financial conditions. the article cited above about Wachovia conducting drug money laundering jumped into my head immediately after reading the OP. i'm sure Norman wasn't even aware of this information. this is Sun Tzu warfare with these banksters and we need representatives who have the knowledge and ability to jump into the mud with these guys but yet counter any false argument they throw out in a calm thoughtful manner.
Topic: Article: Citi Bank Slaps Down Bitcoin - page 2. (Read 4156 times)
in other news Visa, MasterCard to Raise Small-Purchase Fees, Analyst Says
CCs going to start charging ~10% for small purchases with debit cards - more merchants for Bitcoin =)
CCs going to start charging ~10% for small purchases with debit cards - more merchants for Bitcoin =)
Quote
The article sounds like it's trying to create a conflict out of nothing. What exactly is the practical basis of the conflict between Citi and bitcoin?
+1 This article is essentially a biased, scewed and poorly written excuse for a piece of reporting. Hell I have students in grade 6-8 that write a hell of a lot better than this.
The article sounds like it's trying to create a conflict out of nothing. What exactly is the practical basis of the conflict between Citi and bitcoin?
Quote
Yea, not sure either and he was listed as a'co-founder' of Bitcoin, correct? And I say mad props to him for being there to begin with. Along with all the other digitals, that is. There were some other concepts mentioned there that may be worth looking into. It would be nice to see a full script of the conference.
Donald Norman is a member of the Bitcoinconsultancy along with Genjix, Phantomcurcuit and quite a few others, they run Intersango.com (free exchange) Vibanko (online wallet) and are involved in a ton of other decent stuff.
BTW Citi knowingly and willingly aid and abet income-tax evasion, corporate tax evasion and a ton of other types of financial skullduggery by offering accounts to individuals resident in one place but taxable in another. This they have no way of denying heck they even offer up such services to leading members of the cccp and various North Korean companies or rather subsidiaries thereof (terrorism, arms deals and what not).
If someone with a bit more time and google skills on their hands goes to work Citi can quickly start looking like what they really are
Not sure who Donald Norman is. But he DID walk straight into the enemy camp there.
Yea, not sure either and he was listed as a'co-founder' of Bitcoin, correct? And I say mad props to him for being there to begin with. Along with all the other digitals, that is. There were some other concepts mentioned there that may be worth looking into. It would be nice to see a full script of the conference.
Not sure who Donald Norman is. But he DID walk straight into the enemy camp there.
Quote
But when Donald Norman, co-founder of fellow digital currency provider Bitcoin was questioned on how the decentralised peer to peer payment scheme could quell industry concerns about money laundering, a convincing answer was not forthcoming. Instead it was suggested that the topic was being used to create "negativity around new online payment initiatives.
In terms of having a serious discussion, I don't see what their problem is. I mean, what answer would have been convincing? And, can Citi quell world citizens' concerns about money laundering through the banking 1.0 system? They brought up the fact that they work with the regulations of the 149 countries that they have banking licenses in. Am I supposed to infer that if somebody says an institution complies with banking regulations, then that institution isn't used to launder money? Why should I believe that? I don't know yet exactly how the discussions went at the conference, but this article makes it sound like a bunch of fifth graders trying to sound like adults at a school hosted debate.
Aye, that of course was their prelude to pitching the fact they will be working with google wallet...... Its just like Stephen Gornick pointed out about the horsemen of the infopocolypse. Step one; bash any possible competition. step two; introduce your new product.
Quote
But when Donald Norman, co-founder of fellow digital currency provider Bitcoin was questioned on how the decentralised peer to peer payment scheme could quell industry concerns about money laundering, a convincing answer was not forthcoming. Instead it was suggested that the topic was being used to create "negativity around new online payment initiatives.
In terms of having a serious discussion, I don't see what their problem is. I mean, what answer would have been convincing? And, can Citi quell world citizens' concerns about money laundering through the banking 1.0 system? They brought up the fact that they work with the regulations of the 149 countries that they have banking licenses in. Am I supposed to infer that if somebody says an institution complies with banking regulations, then that institution isn't used to launder money? Why should I believe that? I don't know yet exactly how the discussions went at the conference, but this article makes it sound like a bunch of fifth graders trying to sound like adults at a school hosted debate.
When someone says "money laundering," "terrorism," or "child pornography," the ability to carry on an intelligent conversation just ended.
Sorta like when someone posts on bitcointalk.orgWhen someone says "money laundering," "terrorism," or "child pornography," the ability to carry on an intelligent conversation just ended.
That would be three of the four horsemen of the infopocolypse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse
Its the main argument the government has put forth already in two words....
"Silk" & "Road"...followed by a pause and then "bitcoin"
Rinse & Repeat until the masses think bitcoin is for killers or doped out losers.
Its anti-bitcoin to get into a shouting war about it. Its all about getting results...proof of work...hehehehe. Its all about the long-run.
Let the shills say what they want to say for the WWF spectacle.
"Silk" & "Road"...followed by a pause and then "bitcoin"
Rinse & Repeat until the masses think bitcoin is for killers or doped out losers.
Its anti-bitcoin to get into a shouting war about it. Its all about getting results...proof of work...hehehehe. Its all about the long-run.
Let the shills say what they want to say for the WWF spectacle.
When someone says "money laundering," "terrorism," or "child pornography," the ability to carry on an intelligent conversation just ended.
Sorta like when someone posts on bitcointalk.org 
When someone says "money laundering," "terrorism," or "child pornography," the ability to carry on an intelligent conversation just ended.
Bitcoin would infringe on the banking cartel's drug money business, and they don't want the competition!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35914759/ns/business-world_business/t/wachovia-settle-drug-money-laundering-case/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35914759/ns/business-world_business/t/wachovia-settle-drug-money-laundering-case/
(Not shilling Camp BX this time, just sharing some personal thoughts)
Came across this article about a face-off between 7 next-gen currency start-ups / technologies vs. Citi group.
http://www.finextra.com/news/fullstory.aspx?newsitemid=22993
The outcome according to FinExtra was:
This statement made me wonder: Should Banking Industry really be using money laundering to knock on Bitcoins?
Billions of dollars in drugs trade, funding for illegal weapons for warlords, and even funding for terrorist attacks have all gone through the international banking system successfully. Banks have done a better job of harassing legitimate businesses rather than preventing these activities.
Bitcoin technology has the potential to do a little better. Electronic bank balances can rarely be traced all the way back to printing presses, while every Bitcoin's lineage can be traced all the way back to genesis block. And more importantly, bank balances do not have built-in scripting ability like Bitcoin does.
I am curious to hear the Bitcoin community's thoughts on this.
- Keyur
Came across this article about a face-off between 7 next-gen currency start-ups / technologies vs. Citi group.
http://www.finextra.com/news/fullstory.aspx?newsitemid=22993
The outcome according to FinExtra was:
Quote
And despite all the talk of peer to peer transfers, social networks and decentralized currencies, it was the age-old topic of regulation and money laundering that delivered the decisive blow.
This statement made me wonder: Should Banking Industry really be using money laundering to knock on Bitcoins?
Billions of dollars in drugs trade, funding for illegal weapons for warlords, and even funding for terrorist attacks have all gone through the international banking system successfully. Banks have done a better job of harassing legitimate businesses rather than preventing these activities.
Bitcoin technology has the potential to do a little better. Electronic bank balances can rarely be traced all the way back to printing presses, while every Bitcoin's lineage can be traced all the way back to genesis block. And more importantly, bank balances do not have built-in scripting ability like Bitcoin does.
I am curious to hear the Bitcoin community's thoughts on this.
- Keyur
Jump to: